I am a principal at Economists Incorporated, a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute, and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. I am the co-author of the e-book The Need for Speed: A New Framework for Telecommunications Policy for the 21st Century (Brookings Institution Press 2013), and the book Broadband in Europe: How Brussels Can Wire the Information Society (Kluwer/Springer Press). I am a frequent speaker and editorial writer, and my essays have appeared in several leading newspapers and magazines, including Antitrust, The Antitrust Source, Forbes, The Economist's Voice, Harvard Business Review, Health Affairs, Milken Institute Review, Regulation, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post. I have also advised several companies in the media industry, including Apple, AT&T, Google, MLB, NFL Network and the Tennis Channel.

Argentina Has the Power to Avoid Catastrophe

Argentina is spiraling into chaos. The culprit here is the short-sighted, politically charged, irresponsible economic policy of the government, forcing up inflation, drying up investment, and triggering capital flight with each successive bad idea. The situation deteriorates each day, but Argentina is not yet slave to gravity alone. If its government acts decisively, it can still arrest this descent before it becomes a death spiral.

Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner’s regime has borrowed repeatedly from socialist Venezuela’s playbook of economic misery over the years: first seizing Aerolineas, the nation’s largest airline, and then, in April 2012, snatching YPF, its largest oil company; then, announcing trade restrictions that require importers obtain a permit for every good brought into the country; and ordering supermarkets to freeze prices for two months.

Compounding the misery, the Kirchner trade restrictions triggered a round of complaints to the World Trade Organization by Mexico, the United States, the European Union, and Japan. Trade reprisals are expected by Mexico and Brazil.

February was a particularly bad month for the country. The World Bank labeled Argentina the “world’s most protectionist country.” And the International Monetary Fund censured Argentina for its dishonest reporting of its own inflation statistics.

And now the legal noose is tightening. A U.S. appeals court appears poised to give holdout bondholders total victory in their claim for payment on defaulted Argentine bonds. Argentina’s lawyer boldly asserted last month to the court that its government would choose to default on its restructured debt if ordered to pay certain investors the full $1.3 billion they are owed. When the words, “We would not voluntarily obey such an order” to repay the debt left his mouth, the cost of insuring Argentina’s government bonds skyrocketed.

Argentina does not have the luxury of choosing another default. If Argentina defaults on its debt, there will be hell to pay—and ordinary Argentinians will pay it. Let’s not forget the economic repercussions of Argentina’s 2001 default: Foreign investment fled the country, the peso devalued quickly (causing the cost of imports to rise and producing higher-than-average inflation), and Argentina was shut out of the international financial market for several years. Unemployment reached 25 percent, civil unrest ensued, and tens of thousands of Argentinians scavenged the streets for cardboard to sell to recycling plants. Argentine food and drug exports were rejected by some countries, for fear they might arrive damaged by the chaos.

Defaults can also generate a ripple effect on other countries near default, leading to a global recession. The default of tiny Iceland in 2009 has been credited with aggravating the global financial crisis.

The destruction wrought from default is much worse than the cost of battling hypothetical, follow-on lawsuits that Argentina argues could follow a court victory by the holdouts. It would be astonishing if Argentina, as part of its prior settlements with some creditors, did not condition its payment to the so-called “exchange bondholders” on their waiving rights to seek better terms in the event of a subsequent settlement with the holdouts. In sum, holding the exchange bondholders hostage to avoid paying the holdouts achieves nothing: It merely prolongs the country’s agony and further isolates Argentina from the rest of the world.

Argentina has ample resources to extinguish these debts. As of the end of 2012, the country had reserves of $45 billion, and its public debt as a percentage of GDP was 40 percent. In the context of Argentina’s cash reserves, the $1.3 billion owed to its holdout creditors is a manageable figure.

Argentina is perched at that critical juncture between survivable crisis, and certain, inexorable misery. It still has the power to choose the right path. Resolving the dispute with the holdouts would restore investors’ confidence in loaning money to Argentina, immediately open the door for more foreign direct investment, and reduce the country’s borrowing costs. Future lenders are watching.

To ensure long-term economic growth, Argentina should jettison its trade restrictions and price freezes, properly compensate investors for seized assets, and abide by IMF reporting rules. More immediately, and to avoid certain economic ruin, Argentina can begin with honoring its debts.

President Kirchner has used the holdouts as a foil to prop up her populist agenda, portraying them as foreign “vultures,” even though many are individual pensioners. She’s milked this line of argument long enough. Now is the time for her to act like a grown up and do the hard work of building the country.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

The article is very negative towards Argentina and based on writers assumptions and the facts are Argentina is growing and doing well, 3rd largest shale gas in the world. Chevron, Total and many other companies are seeding $1 Billion plus into the country. The Govt, has taken steps to settle the Repsol compensation, They are bringing out a formula to pay to the holdouts. Things are on track, just because UK govt doesn’t like Argentina’s claim on Malvinas, shouldn’t mean that people who can write big articles take advantage and go negative on a country. State the facts as they are, Argentina’s economy has started rising for good.

There is a moral difference between the relatively small amount of defaulted debt held by individual pensioners and the holdings of the well-named vultures. Sovereign debt always entails the risk of default, which is why yields are often so high. The original bonds were junk when issued. Rightly so, Argentina doesn’t cry for the vultures. The US Courts should not either.

Excellent commentary and right on the mark. Argentina is already an agricultural powerhouse and could easily exploit its farmlands and natural resources to further expand its exports of meat, fruits and vegetables. What is hampering an even greater explosion in this sector are artificial export restrictions by Cristina’s government aimed at suppressing domestic inflation at the supermarket and a host of antagonistic protectionism that has alienated its historic trading partner Brazil. With Chavez’s death, perhaps Brazil will be able to entice Argentina into the pragmatic free market leftist society that the larger trading partner has embraced.

The problem is, Mr. Singer, that Argentina is not a farm, nor your backyard. It is a sovereign country and it can make its own decisions, like not paying debt to vulture funds, empower its economy through industrialisation and value-added economy (sorry, no fruit or vegetables or fruits for you). Argentina is doing very well without your archaic and enslaving recipes.

Where is the evidence of the “industrialization and value-added economy?” Perhaps you are referring to the hundreds of new rail and subway cars being built in China, that could instead have been assembled in Argentina by Argentine workers. Or is it the run-away inflation? I agree neigher with foreign proscriptives for Argentina, nor the jingoistic, “God is Argentine” defense of an indefensible political-economic system. You get only one hand of God miracles, and Argentine used it up for a football match in 1978.